Advertisement

A spiral model teaching mobile application development in terms of the continuity principle in school and university education

  • G. AimichevaEmail author
  • Zh. Kopeyev
  • Zh. Ordabayeva
  • N. Tokzhigitova
  • S. Akimova
Article
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

The article is devoted to the issues of teaching mobile application development and, as a consequence, training of highly qualified in-demand mobile developers. Nowadays, training professional mobile developers is a crucial task all over the world. The researchers emphasize the complexity of mobile application development associated with its multidisciplinarity, the mobile device hardware limitations, the necessity of object-oriented programming in the mobile development. Due to the complexity of the mobile development field and the gap in programming knowledge of first-year students, there are fears that prepare highly qualified mobile developers during undergraduate education is impossible. In this regard, the article proposes a spiral model teaching mobile application development with the aim of effective training of mobile developers. The spiral model covers all levels of teaching programming from high school to higher education with aim to develop knowledge from introductory programming to mobile application development. The offered spiral model suggests the continuity in the content and overcoming the gap in programming knowledge between high school and higher education. Such a model is the most appropriate for the training of highly qualified mobile developers in the context of Kazakhstan’s education system.

Keywords

Mobile application development (MAD) GAP in programming knowledge Continuity in teaching MAD Mobile developers Spiral model 

Notes

References

  1. Alston, P. (2012). Teaching Mobile Web Application Development: Challenges Faced And Lessons Learned, In: Proceedings of 13th Annual Conference on Information Technology Education (SIGITE ‘12), 239–244.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2380552.2380620
  2. Araujo, L. G. J., Bittencourt, R. A., & Santos, D. (2018). An Analysis of a Media-Based Approach to Teach Programming to Middle School Students. In Proceedings of The 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Baltimore, MD, USA, Feb. 21–24, 2018 (SIGCSE ‘18),  https://doi.org/10.1145/3159450.3159526
  3. Bers, M. U. (2017). Coding as a playground: Programming and CT in the early childhood classroom. Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Buitrago Flórez, F., Casallas, R., Hernández, M., Reyes, A., Restrepo, S., & Danies, G. (2017). Changing a generation’s way of thinking: Teaching CT through programming. Review of Educational Research, 87(4), 834–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cheung, J., Ngai, G., Chan, S., and Lau, W. (2009). Filling the gap in programming instruction: A text-enhanced graphical programming environment for junior high students, SIGCSE Symposium on Computer Science Education, Chattanooga, TN, March 2009, pp. 276–280.Google Scholar
  7. Coelho, C. S., & Moles, D. R. (2016). Student perceptions of a spiral curriculum. European Journal of Dental Education, 20(3), 161–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dillashaw, F., & Bell, S. (1985). Learning outcomes of computer programming instruction for middle-grades students: A pilot study, Proceedings of the 58th annual meeting of the National Association for research in science technology. IN: Indiana Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED255360.pdf.Google Scholar
  9. Dodero, J.M., Mota, J.M., & Ruiz-Rube, I. (2017). Bringing CT to teachers' training: A workshop review. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (p. 4). ACM.Google Scholar
  10. Fronza I, Corral L, Pahl C (2019). Combining Block-Based Programming and hardware prototyping to Foster CT. In Proceedings of the 20th Annual SIG Conference on Information Technology Education (pp. 55-60). ACM.Google Scholar
  11. Funke, A., Geldreich, K., & Hubwieser, P. (2017). Analysis of scratch projects of an introductory programming course for primary school students. In 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1229-1236). IEEE.Google Scholar
  12. Good, J., Yadav, A., & Mishra, P. (2017). CT in computer science classrooms: Viewpoints from CS educators. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 51-59). Association for the Advancement of computing in education (AACE).Google Scholar
  13. Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). An essay on the construction of formal operational structures. The growth of logical thinking: From childhood to adolescence (A. Parsons & S. Milgram, Trans.). New York: Basic Books. 10. 1037/10034-000.
  14. Joshi, G., & Desai, P. (2016). Building software testing skills in undergraduate students using spiral model approach. In 2016 IEEE eighth international conference on technology for education (t4e) (pp. 244-245). IEEE.Google Scholar
  15. Kafai, Y., & Burke, Q. (2013). Computer programming goes back to school. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(1), 61–65.  https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171309500111. https://www. researchgate. net/publication/256005803. Accessed: 25 May 2019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Karakozov S.D., Manyakhina V.G. (2016). Teaching informatics in South Korea: The analysis of textbooks for primary and secondary schools. Informatics and Education (1):11–16. (In Russ.)Google Scholar
  17. Maloney, J., Resnick, M., Rusk, N., Silverman, B., & Eastmond, E. (2010). The scratch programming language and environment. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 10(4), 16.Google Scholar
  18. Morelli, R., de Lanerolle, T., Lake, P., Limardo, N., Tamotsu, E., & Uche, C. (2011). Can android app inventor bring CT to k-12. In Proc. 42nd ACM technical symposium on Computer science education (SIGCSE'11).Google Scholar
  19. Z. Nurbekova, G. Aimicheva, (2018) «Teaching Mobile Application Development: from the Idea to the Result», 3rd International Conference on Computer Science and Engineering (UBMK) IEEE, pp. 666-669, 2018.Google Scholar
  20. Offir, B., Barth, I., Lev, Y. & Shteinbok, A. (2003). Teacher–student interactions and learning outcomes in a distance learning environment. Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 65-75. Elsevier Ltd. https://www. learntechlib. org/p/96514/. Accessed: 17 May 2019.
  21. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. In Children, computers and powerful ideas. New York: Basic books.Google Scholar
  22. Papert, S. (1991). Situating constructionism. In S. Papert & I. Harel (Eds.), Constructionism. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  23. Pinar, Muyan-Özçelik (2017). A hands-on cross-platform mobile programming approach to teaching OOP concepts and design patterns, Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Software Engineering Curricula for Millennials, May 20–28, Buenos Aires, Argentina.  https://doi.org/10.1109/SECM.2017.12
  24. Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., . & Kafai, Y. B. (2009). Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Saltan, F. (2016). Looking at algorithm visualization through the eyes of pre-service ICT teachers. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 4(2), 403–408.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Sánchez Viveros, B. (2018). The cognitive benefits of learning computer programming: A meta-analysis of transfer effects. Journal of Educational Psychology. Advance online publication.  https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying CT. Educational Research Review, 22, 142–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Siadaty, M., Taghiyareh, F. (2007) PALS2: Pedagogically adaptive learning system based on learning styles, icalt, (pp. 616-618), 7th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT).  https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2007. 198. https://www. researchgate. net/publication/221424232. Accessed: 09 May 2019.
  29. Standard curriculum on the subject (n.d.-a). «Computer science» for grades 5–9 of basic secondary education on the updated content. Developed in accordance with the State compulsory standard of secondary education (primary, basic secondary, General secondary education), approved by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated August 23, 2012 № 1080.Google Scholar
  30. Standard curriculum on the subject (n.d.-b). «Computer science» for grades 10–11 of basic secondary education on the updated content. Developed in accordance with the State compulsory standard of secondary education (primary, basic secondary, General secondary education), approved by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated August 23, 2012 № 1080.Google Scholar
  31. Stone, J. A. (2019). Student perceptions of computing and computing majors. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 34(3), 22–30.Google Scholar
  32. Taft, D. K. (2007). Programming grads meet a skills gap in the real world. Retrieved September.Google Scholar
  33. Tan, P.H., Ting, C. Y., & Ling, S. W. (2009). Learning difficulties in programming courses: undergraduates' perspective and perception, International Conference on Computer Technology and Development 2009 (ICCTD'09), 42–46, 2009.Google Scholar
  34. Wagner, A., Gray, J., Corley, J., and Wolber, D., (2013). Using App Inventor in a K - 12 Summer Camp, SIGCSE '13 , 621–626.Google Scholar
  35. Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Yardi, S. & Bruckman, A. (2007) What is computing?: Bridging the gap between teenagers’ perceptions andgraduate students’ experiences. In Anderson, R., Fincher, S., & Guzdial, M. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third international Workshop on Computing Education. https://www. cc. gatech. edu/conferences/icer2007/slides/yardi-talk. pdf. Accessed: 11 May 2019.
  37. Zorana, E. (2003). Bridging the knowledge gap between secondary and higher education. College and Research Libraries, 64, 75–85.  https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.64.1.75 https://www. researchgate. net/publication/279437426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Aimicheva
    • 1
    Email author
  • Zh. Kopeyev
    • 1
  • Zh. Ordabayeva
    • 2
  • N. Tokzhigitova
    • 3
  • S. Akimova
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Computer scienceL.N. Gumilyov Eurasian National UniversityNur-SultanKazakhstan
  2. 2.Senior lecturer at Pavlodar State University named after S. ToraigyrovPavlodarKazakhstan
  3. 3.Pavlodar State University named after S. ToraigyrovPavlodarKazakhstan
  4. 4.Senior lecturer at M.Utemisov West-Kazakhstan State UniversityUralskKazakhstan

Personalised recommendations